Bug#1007717: Draft resolution for "Native source package format with non-native version"
On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 08:19:29PM +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> Please keep in mind that this is about trade-offs. It is a question of
> how we value "package ownership". If we favour the strong ownership
> approach that Debian used for a long time, then yes accommodating the
> needs of maintainers is paramount. If we want to lessen the concept of
> ownership, embrace drive-by contributions and decentralize maintenance,
> then we need a stronger focus on uniformity. I suppose that my own
> opinion on this matter is fairly obvious at this point.
This is also a significant issue for downstreams. With my Ubuntu hat
on, if I have to touch packages downstream, I loathe it everytime I
get a non-descript blob of all the changes.
I suspect this is the same for other downstream distributions that
want to modify packages. We cannot cater to everyone's individual
packaging repository approach, and downstream repositories if they
exist are separate anyhow.
Using 1.0 instead of 3.0 (quilt) is just being a hostile upstream,
like Red Hat is with dumping all their kernel patches together.
--
debian developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev
ubuntu core developer i speak de, en
Reply to: